Iran Military Forum

There was one Swedish example where they named their child "pOp" and are not going to reveal his/her gender to anyone. They're going to raise him/her as a unisex child.

That is disgusting in my opinion. Feminists are actually very counter productive for women in my opinion. They think Freedom to symbolize themselves as sex objects is liberating.

Read this Barberry: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=swedish+couple+name+their+child+pop&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

... and I'm sure you realize that is not representative of even a small, small, fraction of the people here? Either way, all I'm saying is that this talk about Sweden being über liberal with people walking around naked and what not is pure fiction. In all honestly, the Swedish broads dress much less revealing than their Iranian counterparts and wear about a kilo less make-up...

Did i say they are? stop being so defensive man.

As for the last part, that is definately not true, not even close.

Have you been to Iran lately? There are more (fake) blondes there than in Europe, and it looks like a rainbow has thrown up on their faces.

Yes but they all still wear modest clothing, regardless of how promiscuous they make it appear. At the end of the day, at most, you can see some of their hair, some of their wrist and some of the ankle.

I mean under the hejab of course. The way people dress at weddings or just ordinary mehmonis is chocking at times...

Sure it is (shocking at is  ), but for an Iranian man. What they wear at those mehmoonies would be considered as modest by the average British person at least (i can't really talk about the rest of europe but i expect it to be the same).

Care to elaborate on how exactly Norwegians are sick of gender equality? There is a debate going on whether or not affirmative action is the way to go or if it is counter productive, but nothing along the lines of what you describe. You should also be aware that people can have different roles in society and still be equal.

If i didnt say so i did mean gender equality laws, that is, laws that is directed at forcing the society through policy to change the standard of women compared to women. These laws are today seen by a big majority as discriminatory, puts pressure on family values and ineffective, according to a recent study. And i must say thats what ive though about it as well since ive been aware of the subject.

Gender equality laws here have become gender same laws sort of... I believe if people become more aware of the negative sides of these laws the vast majority will be against the policies behind them.

Yes, its not truly bringing gender equality. Its bringing devastation to peoples lives. Its great with equality, but women here think they are superwoman that don't need man for anything except to seed their plant. They don't need that soon anymore as "science prospers" for seed plantation. Norway for example is severely anti-women in private sector. Except if its a traditional womens work. But then they have to deal with the lack of respect of them and the less money payed to them as they are women. Nothing has ever changed really, except the way things are portrayed.

Im quite aware of the modern states wishes and goals thank you, where everything of values is second that of the value and amount of $. The last part you said is open for debate to say the least....

Men and women are innately different, there will always, on average, be differences in workplace performance in different fields.

To create true gender workplace equality, one would have to implement of the following:

1.) Structure the economy such that a job market develops that provides, on average, roughly the same economic benefit to men and women. Such an economic strategy would likely be a drag on productivity.

2.) Force workplaces to hire an equal number of each gender for each field and pay both genders on the same scale. Greatest reduction of productivity.

3.) Engineer our population such that our men are more 'feminine' in their talents and vice versa. A downright creepy solution.

I hold a different view altogether:
A govt.'s aim in implementation of affirmative action or any sort of related quota system should be aimed more toward improving innovation and productivity in the workplace than serving some imagined social good.
I suppose the above may ideally necessitate 'quotas' differing depending on the relevant field for which the person is looking for a job.
So, businesses should be encouraged to give slight preference to females if their utility to society is improved with the innate biological strengths of females. Obviously considerations such as actual achievements and talents should be given priority.

... crazy talk.

Yes, its a very crazy world.

Very few families in western Europe can manage with the salary of the man alone and it is out of pure necessity that women are required to work. With increased levels of welfare comes also a need for more workers who contribute to society with labour and tax.

The fields which are dominated by women, even in the most liberal of western states, are education and healthcare, just like Islamic Iran. If we are to educate women they must also contribute to the advancement of society. Nothing is more wasteful than to have highly educated women turning housewife as soon as they marry.

True, and that's why i said everything is about money. So from what i can understand you just deny my rhetoric, not the meaning of it.

Its not baseless that equality laws have created issues in the society, if that's what you mean.

That is what I mean when I say...

Gender equality and affirmative action has nothing to do with changing the role of women but rather making it possible for them to have leading roles in society without being neglected solely based on their gender. There are no campaigns  or laws in Norway or any other country standing in the way of women taking more "traditional" roles if they so wish.

What you say is not real.

Edit: I don't really want to argue about this. I feel everyone should understand this when they live in such a country like Sweden and Norway and have backgrounds from other culture, but clearly i need to explain a little more.

For example... Equality laws in Norway make it much easier for men who have become a father to take the role of traditional women in the family, for example being home with child while women is out working. That forces men to adjust themselves to such a position. But at the same time, women have not got any better position otherwise in the society. example http://www.dagsavisen.no/innenriks/article467226.ece So its a lose-lose situation for women, child and confusing for men. Yes, men can choose else, but when all the pro's is for those who choose to "become modern dad", and the moral rules of society does not have any strong position, men will naturally choose to change their ways according for economic pro's. So there are things standing in the way for traditional living. Directly forcing people to choose living is not the only way to force people to choose a living. Through laws and customs are another, or economic encouragement. And mind that this is only one small example of a wide network of related issues.

Basically what i am saying and you must respect this, gender equality is not all good. Having a critical voice is also important when you are not happy about way things are going.